Guideline 5(interner Link) emphasises that research achievements must be evaluated based on transparent and verifiable assessment criteria. These criteria should reflect the various dimensions of a researcher’s outputs, with a particular focus on originality, quality and relevance. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA(externer Link)) provides a normative and practically applicable reference framework for this purpose.

San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA)

DORA was adopted in 2013 with the aim of counteracting assessment practices based on the widespread but methodologically questionable use of publication-based metrics, in particular the Journal Impact Factor (JIF). The JIF is an indicator of the frequency with which articles in a given journal are cited. It is calculated by relating the number of citations in a given year to the number of publications in the two preceding years (Lewandowski 2006). According to DORA, the JIF is not suitable for assessing the quality of individual research outputs or academic careers, nor was it ever intended for that purpose. Its use is said to entail structural distortions, discipline-specific inequalities and incentives for strategic manipulation. For this reason, DORA calls on research institutions and funding organisations to avoid using journal-based metrics, such as the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), as a measure of the quality of individual research articles, and instead to focus their assessment on the quality of the research content itself, while acknowledging the diversity of research outputs.

The Practical Guide

Published in 2025, the Practical Guide to Implementing Responsible Research Assessment at Research Performing Organizations(externer Link) translates the DORA principles into practical steps research institutions can implement, offering hands-on guidance, resources and illustrative examples for the ongoing development of responsible assessment practices. In alignment with Guideline 5(interner Link), it differentiates between multiple dimensions of research assessment. The assessment criteria set out therein are expanded to include contributions to the promotion of research integrity, for example.

The Practical Guide also consolidates existing resources and tools. For instance, the referenced Researcher Impact Framework(externer Link) distinguishes between knowledge generation, career and collaboration development, support for the research community and societal impact, while the SPACE rubric(externer Link) offers structure and support for self-assessment and the further development of institutional assessment practices, for example.

Bibliography

Lewandowski, D. (2006). Schlagwörter des Wissenschaftssystems: Journal Impact Factor. (IFQ)(externer Link)

On this topic see also

DORA toolkit(externer Link)